In Re: Radmax, Limited
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 12426
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- Radmax, Ltd. petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking transfer of venue from the Marshall Division to the Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas.
- The district court applied the Gilbert/§1404(a) eight-factor framework and denied transfer, finding Tyler not clearly more convenient than Marshall.
- The court weighed five factors as neutral, one inapplicable, one against transfer, and one slightly in favor, and concluded Radmax did not show Tyler was clearly more convenient.
- Radmax argues all events, witnesses, and sources of proof are in Tyler, making Tyler clearly more convenient; the district court acknowledged some locality considerations but found them insufficient.
- The Fifth Circuit reviews transfer rulings for a clear abuse of discretion and may grant mandamus when a transfer is compelled under Volkswagen II, especially where the transferee forum has virtually all events and witnesses and the plaintiff’s chosen venue has no connection to the case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tyler is clearly more convenient than Marshall. | Radmax contends all evidence and witnesses are in Tyler. | Marshall and Tyler have similar access to proof and witnesses; no clear convenience | Yes; transfer warranted; Tyler clearly more convenient |
| Whether intra-district transfers are governed by the same §1404(a) factors as inter-district transfers. | Factors apply within district; transfers should be treated similarly. | Intra-district transfers may be governed differently; precedent uncertain. | Yes; §1404(a) factors apply intra-district; garden-variety delay not weighty |
| Whether mandamus is the proper remedy to correct a denial of transfer. | Writ is appropriate to correct patently erroneous denial where venue is clearly more convenient. | Ordinary appellate review would suffice; mandamus is extraordinary. | Mandamus granted; writ issued and stay granted |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Volkswagen of Am., Inc. (Volkswagen II), 545 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2008) (mandamus when transfer denied where no factor favors plaintiff's venue; intra-district context addressed)
- In re Volkswagen AG (Volkswagen I), 371 F.3d 201 (5th Cir. 2004) (100-mile threshold for witness cost impact; intra- vs inter-district considerations outlined)
- In re Horseshoe Entm’t, 337 F.3d 429 (5th Cir. 2003) (exceptional delay considerations in transfer motions; rare and special circumstances)
- In re Ramu Corp., 903 F.2d 312 (5th Cir. 1990) (mandamus for intra-district transfer context; cites extraordinary-circumstances approach)